[OSM-talk] note= vs note=

Dave Stubbs osm.list at randomjunk.co.uk
Tue Jul 31 14:37:09 BST 2007


On 31/07/07, Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net> wrote:
> This is kind of a 'Proposed Features' point, but I'm unhelpfully only
> identifying a problem rather than a solution, because I'm not enough
> of a tag guru to do the latter:
>
> The "note" tag appears to be used for two purposes.
>
> Sometimes, it's general information about the node/way in question
> which doesn't fit into the existing tagspace. For example, "note=built
> in 1785", or "note=formerly a tunnel, now opened out", or "note=my
> mate Dave was sick here".
>
> Other times, it's a surveyor's note. For example: "note=formerly
> tertiary but there's no way anything more than a small car could fit
> down here", "note=I've done this from memory so the road number might
> be wrong", "note=you should draw tunnels as a solid line and use these
> tags, don't draw the dashes individually", etc.
>
> The former might often be rendered on a public-facing map (maybe as a
> tooltip for a webmap), the latter shouldn't be.
>
> I think it'd be really helpful to differentiate the two tags. info= vs
> tag=, maybe?

If it wasn't a trade mark I'd suggest postit= for the latter type :-(




More information about the talk mailing list